2006-12-26 14:25:54 · 23 answers · asked by Libby p 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I would have to say they are equal. Although I would probably be more tolerant of a woman selling her body to feed her baby or children then I would a man who was paying for sex when he has a wife at home waiting for him.
2006-12-26 14:34:59 · answer #1 · answered by nana4dakids 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
neither really, if both parties are consenting adults and both are aware of the nature of the transaction then it is not morally wrong.
the classical definition of a moral right as opposed to a moral wrong is this- "any action that would do the greatest harm to the greatest number is a moral wrong and conversely any action that does the greatest good for the greatest number is a moral right", in your example neither of the two parties is harming the other so long as it is by mutual consent and agreement- in fact the one selling is enriched and the one buying is satisfied so how is this wrong- if you wish to apply some religious view of morality to this scenario you could be here forever.
2006-12-27 00:57:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
neither is morally wrong unless it is hurting some one else, for example a man could love his wife very much but because some thing is wrong that she can't have sex , should he leave her and find some one who can have sex or pay someone who can have sex and then return to his wife he love s and the one who really needs him, I think the answer is obvious , same with a Man if he for some reason couldn't have sex , it should be fair the other way around, this way the ones who love and need one another Can make together,does this not make sense?
2006-12-26 14:47:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I never theory-approximately this lots nor somewhat cared till some years in the past I even have been on morphine for years for an injury i all started stepping right into a precise mess and forgot to place my prescription in and ran out on a friday i presumed i could basically dangle on till finally the monday. I wakened in the early hours of the saturday shivering aching feeling the worst i ever had this went on till the sunday when I called a physician who delivered me oramorph and have been given my family participants to come again and assemble a prescription for me it nonetheless took a added 2 days to get better. because then I even have had an great sympathy for prostitutes because of the fact they be attentive to they could flow in the path of a similar hell that i did in the event that they do no longer enable filthy previous men to degrade them. In my thoughts it somewhat isn't any distinctive from rape. If a youthful women human beings became having an allergies attack and a guy pronounced i will basically provide you an inhaler in case you suck me off could you no longer think of that became a splash off. those women human beings are all someones daughter and have been all advantageous to somebody as quickly as no person can be used like this.
2016-10-28 10:46:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The goody goody making the assumption that their moral compass is straight enough to judge anyone else's life choices is the most wrong out of the three. This country really needs to get over the last vestiges of our puritan forefathers and get on with living.
2006-12-26 14:37:02 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Objective truth is that there is a demand for sex, and we all know what demand creates: supply! The only morality or lack thereof is the one that you yourself see within the situation. If someone's willing to pay, there will always be someone willing to sell if the price is right. Please, realize that not all humans are up to your impeccable infallible moral standards.
2006-12-26 14:33:24 · answer #6 · answered by eatmorec11h17no3 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
neither
The only thing that's morally wrong is if the person selling their body is forced to by another person, or by circumstances
2006-12-26 14:34:15 · answer #7 · answered by Clarkie 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Neither.... as long as both parties are consenting adults. I would say that if you are of majority age, you have the right to do with your body as you see fit. This would include drug usage as well. While I would think that selling your body for money or using drugs is amoral, it's not my body. As long as neither party is harming others with their actions, I don't see any problem with it at all.
Tax the poor !!!
2006-12-26 14:28:08 · answer #8 · answered by Scorpius 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
They are equally immoral but if you wanted the process to stop you have to start with the one selling it. Without the goods no sale of goods.
2006-12-26 14:36:25 · answer #9 · answered by Brianne 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
People in our country have taken (or are at least working on) God out of everything. So who is left to judge morality?
Should we go by our governments morals? Do they have any?
Do we want to go by my morals?
How about we go by Bobs?
It is not our governments job to legislate morality.
2006-12-26 14:29:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋